The Westphalian System of the Modern International Relations: Violation of Sovereignty, Ignoration of Indigenous Rights, and Extension of Medieval Practices in the Case of Mosul Occupation
Öz
The Westphalian system refers to the shifting of the supreme political authority from medieval practices to modern sovereign states and related concepts such as sovereignty, non-intervention, and international law. While the system has shaped the Western political environment since 1648, it has in fact not been validated for the rest of the world. In this paper, the idea that the Westphalian system has not opened a new avenue in the discipline of International Relations is exemplified by the case of the British occupation of the Mosul Vilayet. Contrary to the terms of the Mudros Armistice and Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points, the British illegally occupied Mosul. The occupation was a clear violation of the Westphalian principles and thus the British mandate regime encountered resistance from both the Ottoman Empire and further the Republic of Türkiye. Despite all resistance, Mosul was ceded to the Iraqi government under the British mandate after the war.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Westphalian System, Sovereignty, Non-intervention, Mosul Occupation, First World War
Kaynakça
- Anghie, Anthony (2004), Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
- Bauder, Harald and Rebecca Mueller (2021), “Westphalian vs. Indigenous Sovereignty: Challenging Colonial Territorial Governance”, Geopolitics, 28 (1): 1-18, DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2021.1920577.
- Beck, Peter (1981), “‘A Tedious and Perilous Controversy’: Britain and the Settlement of the Mosul dispute, 1918–1926”, Middle Eastern Studies, 17 (2): 256-276.
- Brunkhorst, Hauke (2000), “Rights and the Sovereignty of the People in the Crisis of Nation State”, Ratio Juris, 13 (1): 49-62.
- Coşar, Nevin and Sevtap Demirci (2004), “The Mosul Question and the Turkish Republic: Before and After the Frontier Treaty, 1926”, The Turkish Yearbook of International Relations, 35: 43-59.
- Dyer, Gwynne (1972), “The Turkish Armistice of 1918: 2—A Lost Opportunity: The Armistice Negotiations of Moudros”, Middle Eastern Studies, 8 (3): 313-348.
- Evans, Graham and Jeffrey Newnham (1992), The Dictionary of World Politics: A Reference Guide to Concepts, Ideas and Institutions (New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf).
- Eyfinger, Arthur (1998), “Europe in the Balance: An Appraisal of the Westphalian System”, Netherlands International Law Review, 45 (2): 161-187.
- Farr, Jason (2005), “Point: the Westphalia Legacy and the Modern Nation-state”, International Social Science Review, 80 (3-4): 156-159.
- Gross, Leo (1948), “The Peace of Westphalia, 1648-1948”, American Journal of International Law, 42 (1): 20-41.